• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cops grab guy just taking pictures and frisk him

Bodi

Bodi

Just waiting for my set...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
123,766
Reaction score
28,023
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Ridiculous. Tyrants.


 
No sympathy for the guy. He certainly has the freedom to engage in creepy and suspicious behavior, but can’t be outraged when it draws the scrutiny of police.
 
Napoleon said:
No sympathy for the guy. He certainly has the freedom to engage in creepy and suspicious behavior, but can’t be outraged when it draws the scrutiny of police.
Click to expand...
Are you even aware of what the 4th Amendment is? Jeez.
 
Creep and peep can be suspicious, yes
 
Napoleon said:
A pat down only requires reasonable suspicion and the guy’s creepy and suspicious behavior fits the bill.
Click to expand...
No. It takes reasonable suspicion that a crime has/is/will occur.
 
DataPoint said:
Creep and peep can be suspicious, yes
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to the fact that they violated the 4th Amendment.

Do you realize what you are opening up with "suspicious" as a metric? I don't think so... it is one of the main reasons that cops are under fire these days... they have run with impunity with such an open charge that they are running around violating rights of people.
 
Bodhisattva said:
No. It takes reasonable suspicion that a crime has/is/will occur.
Click to expand...
This was explained to you. It meets your own definition. Leave it alone, please, and don't defend a creep.
 
Napoleon said:
No sympathy for the guy. He certainly has the freedom to engage in creepy and suspicious behavior, but can’t be outraged when it draws the scrutiny of police.
Click to expand...

Hmm… is taking pictures of “personal vehicles” now creepy and suspicious behavior? If so, then are police dash and/or body cams also “creepy and suspicious”?

The alleged concern expressed by police (probable cause for a pat down search?) was that he might be armed. In that case, anyone might be armed and thus must consent to a pat down search. The bigger question is: if he had been armed - then what?
 
Somebody needs to work on logical equivalencies.

A private citizen taking 'creepy' photos in public is not the same as that of the police doing it.
 
DataPoint said:
This was explained to you. It meets your own definition.
Click to expand...
Either you are a terrible debater or your understanding of what it means to explain something is lacking.

Suspicious behavior is not the metric that qualifies a police officer to detain and frisk a person... reasonable articulable suspicion that a CRIME has is/has/will take place is the metric.
Leave it alone, please, and don't defend a creep.
Click to expand...
What a pathetic attempt to gain moral superiority. LOL


Please... debate better.
 
DataPoint said:
Somebody needs to work on logical equivalencies.

A private citizen taking 'creepy' photos in public is not the same as that of the police doing it.
Click to expand...
You added creepy... and even though it means literally nothing, you keep saying it.
 
Bodhisattva said:
You added creepy... and even though it means literally nothing, you keep saying it.
Click to expand...
Being creepy isn't a crime. Taking pictures in public isn't a crime, and the mere act of taking photos/videos in public does not rise to the level of suspicion required to legally detain someone for investigation of a crime. Voluntary encounter, sure, see if they'll volunteer personal info, sure(unless it's a stop and identify state). Beyond that, there is nothing they can legally do.
 
ASHES said:
Being creepy isn't a crime. Taking pictures in public isn't a crime, and the mere act of taking photos/videos in public does not rise to the level of suspicion required to legally detain someone for investigation of a crime. Voluntary encounter, sure, see if they'll volunteer personal info, sure(unless it's a stop and identify state). Beyond that, there is nothing they can legally do.
Click to expand...
I wonder why guys like @DataPoint and @Napoleon can't just admit that?
 
ASHES said:
Being creepy isn't a crime. Taking pictures in public isn't a crime, and the mere act of taking photos/videos in public does not rise to the level of suspicion required to legally detain someone for investigation of a crime. Voluntary encounter, sure, see if they'll volunteer personal info, sure(unless it's a stop and identify state). Beyond that, there is nothing they can legally do.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Peeping over a wall to record people, vehicles, and license plates and lurking around and rattling the side gate of the premises created enough reasonable suspicion for a pat down. And we don’t know what was in the edits he snipped out. When you behave like you shouldn’t be doing something as he was then you’re going to attract the attention of the police. And antagonizing the police was the point.
 
Napoleon said:
I disagree. Peeping over a wall to record people, vehicles, and license plates and lurking around and rattling the side gate of the premises created enough reasonable suspicion for a pat down. And we don’t know what was in the edits he snipped out.
Click to expand...
It is not illegal to record public employees in the course of their duties. If they don't want people to see over their fence, they can get a taller fence. None of those activities you described are criminal nor do they provide the reasonable suspicion of a crime.
 
ASHES said:
It is not illegal to record public employees in the course of their duties. If they don't want people to see over their fence, they can get a taller fence. None of those activities you described are criminal nor do they provide the reasonable suspicion of a crime.
Click to expand...
If you don’t want to be subject to a pat down then don’t engage in creepy and suspicious behavior and antagonize the police. It’s that simple. This guy went looking for trouble, did everything he could to cause it, and found it. His disorderly conduct got him a pat down.
 
Napoleon said:
If you don’t want to be subject to a pat down then don’t engage in creepy and suspicious behavior and antagonize the police.
Click to expand...
What crime would you reasonably suspect him of committing by videotaping and seeing if a gate to an occupied lot was locked? Would a reasonable person suspect trespassing? Ridiculous. He never went on the property, or said that is what he was going to do. What behaviour leads you to a reasonable conclusion what crime had been committed, was being committed, or was about to be committed?
 
ASHES said:
What crime would you reasonably suspect him of committing by videotaping and seeing if a gate to an occupied lot was locked? Would a reasonable person suspect trespassing? Ridiculous. He never went on the property, or said that is what he was going to do. What behaviour leads you to a reasonable conclusion what crime had been committed, was being committed, or was about to be committed?
Click to expand...
What he did was disorderly conduct.
 
Napoleon said:
What he did was disorderly conduct.
Click to expand...
There are people that act disorderly that those laws were meant for, and there's contempt of cop. I'm not a cop hater, I generally don't like 1A auditors, especially the ones that act like dicks and immediately have a bad attitude, but even they retain their 1st amendment rights.
 
This clown was intentionally acting in a suspicious way hoping for a reaction. He’s lucky that the reaction was nothing more than it was.
 
Last edited:
Napoleon said:
What he did was disorderly conduct.
Click to expand...
For ****'s Sake... I have watched a lot of these videos and not even the cops have used that stupid approach. You just don't get it. Walking around calmly taking pictures in a public area is not against the law. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Eventually even the cops understand it and leave. Not you though... why?
 
Bodhisattva said:
For ****'s Sake... I have watched a lot of these videos and not even the cops have used that stupid approach. You just don't get it. Walking around calmly taking pictures in a public area is not against the law. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Eventually even the cops understand it and leave. Not you though... why?
Click to expand...
Disorderly conduct is against the law and that’s exactly what the video shows. He wasn’t there nonchalantly taking pictures. He was there engaging in creepy and suspicious behavior with the intent of eliciting a police response to antagonize them.
 
Napoleon said:
If you don’t want to be subject to a pat down then don’t engage in creepy and suspicious behavior and antagonize the police. It’s that simple. This guy went looking for trouble, did everything he could to cause it, and found it. His disorderly conduct got him a pat down.
Click to expand...
The guy went looking for a couple of ignorant cops and found them. An informed officer would have questioned the man politely and found out why he was there.

 
Tahuyaman said:
This clown was intentionally acting in a suspicious way hoping for a reaction. He’s lucky that the reaction was nothing more than it was.
Click to expand...
Spoken like a cop. Why is walking around calmly taking pictures so upsetting to cops that they would say, or do, what you are saying? Why is he lucky? The point he is making is education. To teach cops to stop bullying people, lying and falsely arresting people. That is why it is live streamed too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom